Is this poem idolatry of the worst kind- which is anathema for protestants Jews Sikhs
scribd.com/doc/241197191/Ido … tic-poetry
All that was written in that site is nothing but such a rant that only insaity can produce.
with love,
sanjay
so what is so insane about the poem?
App. Does Einstein’s definition fit here? 
arently Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. Does Einstein’s definition fit here?
smart comment i see you are quoting your god
just shows how mainstream a thinker you are
\if you had quoted some great Persian poet or how about some Upanishad text or perhaps something from Sufi Qutub -even say Milton or even Oscar Wilde it would have shown that you are a bit different but alas just a mainstream thinker
but
i bet you have not even read the poem
prove me wrong and gives us some quotes from the poem-no cheating dont go and read it for the first time now
thank you for your candid comments … what a treat! … i haven’t been called a ‘mainstream’ anything for more than 20 years.
yesterday i opened the the page containing the poem … read a few lines … closed the page … i don’t respond well to being ‘told’ what to do … never have
einstein is my god??? … hardly … i prefer Lao Zi … and since you seem to give credence to quotes … here’s one from Lao Zi … “who can make the muddy water clear?”
you read just a few lines and you have the gul to say
you have not even read the poem and you have the arrogance to post on this topic
now that is a least more like it
but
very simple to answer
any one can just leave the water long enough still and the mus will settle to the bottom leaving the rest clear
typical arrogance of a rugged individual
bet you have got yourself into a lot of trouble that way
if people dont take advice how can they learn and avoid trouble
excuse my blunder … i realize now that my comments were directed at the notion of “idolatry” … not the particular poem you referenced … suppose i should crawl back into my ‘cave’ now
just before i do … it hardly seems plausible that a person with the stature attributed to Lao Zi would waste his time writing words with such a simplistic intention.
i spent some time pondering the verb “make” in the sentence … the verb ‘make’ is not a passive verb is it?
perhaps he was trying to get real clever people to think simply -good example of wu wei non action dont you think you get the clear water by just doing nothing
- you know the saying
"the answer is right in front of your nose -thats why you cant see it
the poem again huh!!
it is certainly more articulate than Solomon’s Song of Songs … yet the overall theme seems the same … a wordy celebration of some event … perhaps an event perceived as communing with the “divine” … some say perception is our reality … written with sexual overtones.
back to Lao Zi
seems our independent understanding of Lao Zi’s quote may be converging … not much … yet perhaps converging just the same.
the words “muddy water” suggest he is using metaphor to convey a complex message … didn’t St Paul use a mirror to convey the same message.
I interpret “muddy water” to be a metaphor for our reality … our “Total Reality”. The adjective “muddy” infers there is some part(s) of our reality we cannot see clearly … we cannot understand clearly … has always been “mystery” and may always be. There is nothing we can do to improve the situation i.e. “Who can make the muddy water clear.”
Taking your comments on “Wu Wei” at face value … I agree that is exactly Lao Zi’s intention. There is absolutely nothing we can do so why waste so much time energy and effort on “Thesis … antithesis … and synthesis” At the end of the day mystery is still mystery … enjoy it and “take no action”
ah but you miss the opening point of the tao te ching
you say Laozi, say “muddy water” to be a metaphor for our reality"
well he has just named the tao-reality ie muddy
thus he contradicts himself
for he also say as above the Tao that is named is not the Tao
but then i hope you are not going to say laozi has to obey the laws of Aristotelian logic
i still believe our thoughts are converging … “not much” … yet converging nonetheless
Apparently Lao Zi wrote “Who can make the muddy water clear?”
Since he is not here to explain what he meant by the above words I went out on a limb … with my ‘small mind’ … and interpreted his words against the backdrop of my personal life experiences.
IL … excuse my blunder! … yet again … i find myself apologizing too often to you … you are giving me a complex.
In my defense … here is more evidence of the aforementioned complex … I did say "At the end of the day mystery is still mystery … enjoy it and “take no action”. I’ll take advantage of hindsight here and suggest my “take no action” comment to include … don’t talk about it.
now you getting closer to Zen
even Wittgenstein
philosophypages.com/hy/6s.htm
but then in contradiction both Lao Zi Zen and Wittgenstein have a voluminous lot to say and speak about
but then in contradiction both Lao Zi Zen and Wittgenstein have a voluminous lot to say and speak about
[/quote]
i don’t know about Zen and Wittgenstein but the story goes that Lao Zi wrote less than 5,000 Chinese pictographs and wrote under protest. Can’t say this part of the Lao Zi story is true though. Matter of fact there is still lots of controversy here in China as to whether there ever was a person referred to as Lao Zi.
doesn’t seem logical to me that if Lao Zi did exist … in the time frame they say he existed … about 500 BC … that he woke up one morning and jotted down 5,000 Chinese pictographs. Seems more logical that his poem would be a synthesis of all Chinese thought prior to his time … written … oral … or otherwise. From this angle his poem would represent at least 5,000 years of Chinese history.
about 500BC
what I find interesting is 3 of the worlds great sages lived around the same time apparently
Buddha Lao Zi Confucius
also Greek philosophy sorta stated then to
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_philosophy
you wonder what was in the air around 500BC
good morning LJ … i don’t know what time zone you live in … i’m currently in China
i’m starting to really like you … seems the ‘wounds’ you inflicted have healed
if you throw Isaiah in with Loa Zi, Budda, Confucius and Socrates you envelop the Judeo- Christian community as well … very interesting indeed.
my gut tells me that “what was in the air” around 500 BC is the same ‘stuff’ that is in the air today
langauge is such a weak instrument for discussion of such a topic … yet it’s all we have … well perhaps not “all” but at least the only tool we have where there is any kind of consensus … albeit the ‘consensus’ is small and fragile within the human community.
let me go out on a limb again …
perhaps we are on the cusp of a massive upheaval within the human community … a massive transformation … a massive awakening
i take some comfort that all of the great sages mentioned above were not very popular in their own lifetime
i feel that if things/ ideas are to new people just dont understand them it seems to take generations for the majority of people to catch up with/ to understand really new ideas
perhaps really original thinkers are lonely -no one to share/ understand their originality with
couldn’t agree more …
on the other hand people who believe they have great new ideas often discover … in their own lifetime … that their great new ideas aren’t so great after all
couldn’t agree more …
on the other hand people who believe they have great new ideas often discover … in their own lifetime … that their great new ideas aren’t so great after all